denyjunctionfunction t1_j5ubwhd wrote

What the FDA did is irrelevant. Read the first word of the title.

> Yes I'm trying to shift the focus to the fact that we need to control what's being sold to be put into youth's bodies. I don't think that's so far off subject.

Don’t shift it from seeing if the overall practice has health issues to just focus on what specific products have issues. That can come separately.


denyjunctionfunction t1_j5u1pey wrote

> why was this the device they chose to use for the study anyway?

Without looking, I’m guessing they just went with the popular choice that everyone is aware of.

> Aren't those illegal now or something?


> what they should be doing is testing all the fake knockoffs from China because those are the ones the kids are getting.

You’re trying to shift the focus. They chose a popular brand. The study isn’t just looking at the effects on children. Those ones would be a follow up study.


denyjunctionfunction t1_j56p0tl wrote

No they aren’t. “Inaccurate” doesn’t deal with context alone. It’s binary in saying it is accurate or not, on a spectrum of how inaccurate/accurate it is. If stats show that X does Y if Z is present, it is not inaccurate to say X does Y. It’s misleading though because the entire context isn’t there, but it is factually correct.